The parent could have made the claim (that you believe they meant) without saying "crippling failure of an organism", and I would still think it was mildly homo

The parent could have made the claim (that you believe they meant) without saying "crippling failure of an organism", and I would still think it was mildly homophobic: - there's literally nothing to stop a homosexual person from biologically reproducing, - it assumes that the only value of an organism is in its Darwinian fitness (its ability to reproduce), which is pretty gross. I reject this assumption. The parent appears to be applying this heuristic of value only so far as it implies a moral failure of homosexuality: it's not a typical measure of value. Humans value other animals more highly than this, without regard to whether they have reproduced.